VATICAN CITY (AP) _ The Vatican took aim at pro-choice Catholic politicians Thursday, telling them that Church teaching demands they defend ``the basic right to life from conception to natural death.''

A new set of guidelines approved by Pope John Paul II for Catholic politicians said that Church opposition to abortion, euthanasia and same-sex marriage was not up for negotiation. The were issued a week before major demonstrations are planned in the United States by pro-choice and anti-abortion groups and amid continuing efforts, mainly in Europe, to legalize euthanasia and gay marriages. The Vatican said it was publishing the document now because of medical and scientific advances and because of the ``emergence of ambiguities or questionable positions in recent times.''

The guidelines, prepared by the Vatican's orthodoxy watchdog, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, don't change the church's long-held positions. Rather, they serve as a reminder of Church teachings for Catholic politicians, so that when they vote for legislation or otherwise influence public policy, they do so in line with certain ``nonnegotiable ethical principles.''

In particular, the document said laws concerning abortion and euthanasia ``must defend the basic right to life from conception to natural death. In the same way, it is necessary to recall the duty to respect and protect the rights of the human embryo.'' It said laws safeguarding marriage between man and woman must be promoted and that ``in no way can other forms of cohabitation be placed on the same level as marriage, nor can they receive legal recognition as such.''

The document also referred vaguely to issues of peace, saying Catholics should not confuse the Church's promotion of peace and rejection of violence with ``secular'' pacificist and ideological visions. The pope's opposition to war in Iraq is likely to make him a rallying point in the event hostilities erupt. ``The Church recognizes that while democracy is the best expression of the direct participation of citizens in political choices, it succeeds only to the extent that it is based on a correct understanding of the human person,'' the document said, adding: ``Catholic involvement in political life cannot compromise on this principle.''

The guidelines don't mention punishment _ such as excommunication _ for Catholic politicians who fail to tow the line. Rather, they frame the issue as one of ``conscience'' that politicians will have to deal with.

``Scientific progress has resulted in advances that are unsettling for the consciences of men and women, and call for solutions that respect ethical principles in a coherent and fundamental way,'' the document said.

``Catholics, in this difficult situation, have the right and the duty to recall society to a deeper understanding of human life and to the responsibility of everyone in this regard,'' it said.

The Vatican stressed that it wasn't trying to dictate policy or interfere in matters of state, but to rather ``instruct and illuminate'' Catholic political leaders. And it challenged the idea that ethical pluralism ``is the very condition for democracy.''

The document was released a week before the 30th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision lifting anti-abortion laws nationwide. Demonstrations by the pro-choice and anti-abortion movements in the United States are planned for Jan. 22.

The Vatican never disguised its irritation with Geraldine Ferraro, a Catholic and the U.S. Democratic vice presidential candidate in 1984, for her position that she opposed abortion but was also opposed to outlawing it. Recently, former Italian Premier Giulio Andreotti, a practicing Catholic, said he deeply regretted having signed the law legalizing abortion in Italy when he was prime minister in 1978.

The Vatican has also been campaigning against efforts, particularly in Europe, to legalize same-sex marriages and offer the unions the same benefits granted to traditional heterosexual marriages.

Jan. 22 also marks the start of the Roman Catholic church's World Meeting of Families _ a five-day meeting in Manila, Philippines to promote family values. Bishop Wilton Gregory, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, welcomed the publication of the document, saying it ``addresses some of the profound challenges faced by Catholic politicians and voters who are confronted with various moral and social issues in the context of a democratic society.'' He said he hoped the document would encourage U.S. Catholic politicians to continue to ``respect the most essential moral values of our human nature.'' The Vatican released similar statements from German and Italian cardinals along with the document Thursday.

While not offering concrete examples of legislation for Catholic politicians to promote, the document does propose a model for them to emulate: St. Thomas More, the 16th century lawyer and diplomat who refused to renounce the pope and recognize the king as head of the English church. King Henry VIII had More beheaded for his positions. Two years ago, Pope John Paul II made More the patron saint for politicians. ``He taught by his life and his death that 'man cannot be separated from God, nor politics from morality,''' the document said.

The guidelines don't mention punishment _ such as excommunication _ for Catholic politicians who fail to tow the line. Rather, they frame the issue as one of ``conscience'' that politicians will have to deal with.

I don't know. There's a brick wall which runs down the middle of the Mississippi. Crossing over happens for work, but not much else.

The other thing to remember - according to the media - there isn't much of interest between the mountain ranges, except for the Cubs. They haven't gone looking recently. No big conferences. No major breaks in any of these cases or juicy details.

This is all very well, but in the end it all comes down to episcopal cojones. If AmChurch bishops are negligent or malfeasant -- and they are -- then the publication of
"new" guidelines is like so much yelling in the face of a hurricane.

I'm glad to see these guidelines. If nothing else, orthodox Catholics always have the pope in their corner. And this pope does have a paper trail doesn't he? He will be cited for generations to come. Viva il papa!

The cooncerns of the Vatican are no longer relevant to American foreign policy...

President Bush appears to think otherwise. He has gone to visit the pope twice in his presidency and has made numerous visits to American prelates. Apparantly he doesn't share your contempt for the Catholic Church.

December 31, 2002
To read the conservative and neoconservative press, youd think that President George W. Bush combined the military genius of Napoleon, the courage of Coriolanus, and the moral wisdom of Confucius. My own view is that he confirms the truth of the adage Never send a boy to do a mans job.

Actually, the presidency is more a Supermans job. Nobody should be given  or trusted with  that much power and responsibility. Nobody can possibly handle it.

By abandoning our Constitution, in which the legislative branch is supreme, we have permitted the executive branch to assume a centrality it was never meant to have. The president is now said to be our leader. Hes expected to provide governance, protection, economic expertise, geopolitical cunning, and inspiration, among other things; and of course he also has to have a talent for raising money and winning elections.

Rare is the man who can master even one of these disparate, unrelated, almost miscellaneous skills. Requiring all of them is like asking a single individual to excel at playing the harpsichord, logical theory, standup comedy, chess, and pole-vaulting.

In these terms, nobody can be a good president. He can only play one on TV. Reagan was superb at this impersonation; Bill Clinton might have been just as good, if only he hadnt set an unhappy precedent by splashing his personal foibles onto the front pages.

But Bush? For most of his first year in the Oval Office he gave us the impression he was lost in the job. After the 9/11 attacks, however, he seemed to achieve a new stature. Maybe we were right the first time.

In the wake of the attacks, Bush adopted the posture of Gary Cooper in High Noon. He played a resolute hero who knew what he was doing. It flew with the public and most of the pundits; even his liberal critics were impressed. But he quickly diverted from a war on terrorism to an irrelevant war on Iraq.

He sealed his obsession with Iraq by naming it one of the three points on an axis of evil, along with Iran and North Korea. He said Iraq posed an urgent danger because it was ruled by a cruel tyrant bent on acquiring nuclear weapons and threatening the whole region, if not the whole world.

Kim has nukes, and hes not hiding it. Hes bragging about it. He dares Bush to stop him. He passes the cruel tyrant test with flying colors. Hes a Communist of the Stalin-Mao ilk, permitting mass starvation in his country rather than relaxing his iron grip. He seems quite cheerfully willing to go to war with his neighbors. And this is to say nothing of his funny teeth and haircut: he even looks eerie.

How cruel is he? Well, desperate North Koreans are actually risking their sorry lives to flee to China, making China the first Communist country ever to have an illegal immigrant problem. The North Korean media call Kim the Dear Leader.

So how is Bush handling this certified monster? Very awkwardly. In amusing contrast to his tough talk about prostrate Iraq, Bush is treating North Korea as a diplomatic problem, nothing urgent. What about those weapons of mass destruction? Surely we can resolve our little differences like gentlemen. What about the axis of evil? Just a figure of speech, it seems. No hard feelings.

Kim seems to feel differently. He may be crazy, but hes not stupid. When he heard Bush speak of that axis of evil, he heard hit list, and he figured North Koreas turn might be coming when Bush was finished with the Middle East.

So Kim decided to upset Bushs schedule by shaking nukes in his face before he was ready. Why wait for war at Bushs convenience? Why not challenge him preemptively, as it were? Sure enough, Bush, the brave cowboy, backed off fast. He realized he wasnt dealing with a mere Saddam Hussein.

So much for Bush the Bold. Yes, the presidency is too big a job for any man, but Bush, its now clear, is far, far out of his depth. Publishing his hit list was an act of the most puerile bravado.

17
posted on 01/16/2003 9:32:32 AM PST
by Catholicguy
(St Ignatius "if anyone follows him that makes a schism, he shall not inherit the Kingdom of God...")

<> War with Iraq? You've got to be kidding. This is the Deathstar against a guy on a goat.

Daddy's Desert Storm I took a little over a month; 1/16/91 - 2/27/91.

Any bets thie one ends faster?

Dubya gives State of the Union address Jan.28. The Super Bowl is on Jan 27. Look for Son of Desert Storm I to begin Sunday -late..or early Monday so he can walk into the joint session to tumultuous applause as the "Commander in Chief."

If you are in Vegas, take America and "under" in the 30 days over/under

18
posted on 01/16/2003 9:50:58 AM PST
by Catholicguy
(St Ignatius "if anyone follows him that makes a schism, he shall not inherit the Kingdom of God...")

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.